Gunpowder Goes Poof!

[2D8HP]

Oh, absolutely.

I was just trying to get across that guns were initially worse than bows, but were still used for different reasons.

.
True, now I'm wondering why only the British had the lifelong training to use longbow, I guess I'll take the question to the

Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXV thread

[Regitnui]

Eberron is one setting. The assumptions of Eberron do not apply to any other setting. Wands coming in by the crate load is one of those Eberron things. This has been explained, over and over. Like, people keep explaining why magic isn't going to replace every mundane weapon, and you just keep claiming it will.

Are you seriously claiming the Romans didn't invent anything? Like, was the engineering done by Gnomes in your version of history?

The Romans invented things. But there wasn't the massive acceleration in all technologies we've experienced over the past half-century or so. If a Roman smith made a shield, it was likely using the same techniques that the Greek 500 years earlier did.

And wands everywhere isn't just an Eberron thing. It happens in many fantasy universes, not just D&D. Eberron might be the premier example in D&D, but don't cut off every branch of speculation that you don't like. See below.

What I'd say is that it would probably depend on the rarity/cost of magic items.

If they're rare/expensive then, as you say, they're going to be mainly used by wealthy nobles and such. However, the basic soldiers are still going to be using mundane weapons of one sort or another.

However, if they're cheap and can be mass-produced, then I could easily see them replacing not just gunpowder weapons but also bows and crossbows (they're lighter, they're far easier to carry/conceal, you don't need to carry ammunition for them, and depending on the spell, you might not even have to aim them).

Not D&D, but there are some 'Fantasy WWII' books wherein the soldiers are basically shooting at one another with magic wands/staffs (referred to as 'sticks').

The problem there is mass production. As a setting in the middle of its Industrial Revolution, Eberron does have the means. Most other settings are stuck in the Middle Ages with little chance of ever leaving. That's where the theory topics like this come in. I think it's entirely plausible that FR, were it allowed to proceed technologically, would eventually mass-produce wands. Since gunpowder is being intentionally kept out of people's minds by their God of Artifice, it's a small step, equivalent to going from hand cannons to matchlocks.

See, I think this sort of idea would be an interesting concept in and of itself. It just gets a bit weird with D&D mechanics, since the spells are done in a very rigid manner.

There was a theory I read that the somatic, verbal and material components are how spells developed in D&D. At first, they were quite literally just trying to force your will on the world. Then someone discovered that using two lodestones made mending simpler to cast. Later, someone (probably randomly swearing at a difficult problem) learned that a certain sequence of syllables made it even easier. Finally, someone else realised that if you held the broken pieces together somehow (in clamps, other people's hands, or with string) and make a certain gesture, the process was even easier.

Via that method, mending would have gone from 3rd level down to cantrip through magical innovation.

There is also real world historic precedent for technologies being lost, sometimes deliberately so.

The Chinese had and scuttled ocean going ships,

The knowledge of making

Roman concrete

was lost for centuries, and the recipe for

Greek fire

is still lost.

In my own work I've seen machines that functioned well for decades stop being used because the guy who knew how to maintain them died, increasingly plumbing fixtures in the building I maintain that work longer with less maintenance need to be replaced with inferior modern replacements because they're"obsolete" and replacement parts are no longer made, steam heating systems that provide more comfortable heat than modern forced air are replaced because the guys who knew how to build them are dead, etc.

Lost technology I have no trouble with. It's a great storytelling trope. What I find unusual is when you can toss your players back in time a century and people still talk the same, use the same spells and items (mundane or magic) the same way, and know precisely what the players are talking about when they ask for the "lost artefact of notinmytime". English from a century ago is odd. English from 500 years ago is for all intents and purposes a different language.

Yeah, various "Fantasyland" timescales are off (I'm looking at you Westeros), while at least in my youth, there were people still living much as their ancestors did 10,000 years ago (at least according to National Geographic), that some parts of a world, post agriculture, could remain technologically stagnant for centuries I may believe, but that all parts for 10,000 years do is a stretch.

I guess a wizard did it.

Or a tyrannically repressive "Lawful Good" god. Also the fantasy version of Sci-Fi Writers Have No Sense of Scale. After all, we only live for about 80 years on average, a generation being about 20. How can fantasy authors really understand that human civilisation (recorded) is only about 5000 years old? That's practically infantile in most fantasy worlds.

[Tiadoppler]

So if I'm allowed to draw that comparison, powerful magic items (Rare and up) would be much like high technology in our world. A drone, for example, might be the equivalent of a Rare magic item; everyone knows about them, and can plan for them, but not every nation has them or can field them.

Yeah, you might get an army that fields a rare item at the platoon level (one item as a support for a few dozen soldiers), or you might get an army that fields extremely elite forces (a squad where each soldier has several items each) in small numbers among a much larger number of non-magically-equipped troops.

You'd definitely get specialist teams in which each member has a variety of common/uncommon equipment, but these would be rarely seen simply because of the cost involved.

While this is all excellent stuff, I'd like to point out that XP isn't necessarily for killing things, but resolving encounters. Nine times out of ten in a game that means "kill everything", but a lot of DMs offer Roleplay XP, or XP for ending encounters by talking down the opponents or avoiding a fight altogether. A person in D&D could get stronger by talking circles around progressively harder-to-fool people, like a lawyer.

I especially like the idea of navy and air force being heavily infantry-focused as well. It's a nice angle to explore. I was going to mention aerial mounts at some point before the battleking tangent. I'm less inclined to mention them now.

I meant the XP thing mostly as a joke. Could you imagine a world in which people can become immortal, or grant wishes, by having a dramatic personal life, or a quirky-but-consistent personality? Maybe the reason NPCs are weak, boring and not fleshed out is because... they're boring people, and they can never gain RP experience because of that. I'm going full-on meta here.

Okay, here are my thoughts on combat:

Spoiler: Fortifications

Show

Tall, picturesque stone castles would be made obsolete by magic (stone shape, just for starters) and aerial bombardment. They would be replaced by cheaper (to build, and to replace) earthworks and bunkers with overhead cover. WWI style trenches and bunkers would be extremely effective in limiting the effects of magical spells and weapons dropped from above. Armies would not stand in Fireball formation volleying at each other, they'd have to spread out and take cover to avoid magical effects.

Spoiler: Naval Ship Design

Show

When you imagine a 'traditional' D&D ship, you're probably thinking of an Age of Sail vessel, with something like ballistae, catapults, or magical doodads as broadside weaponry. This is a great design for dealing with other surface combatants, but a poor design for defending against aerial attack, or underwater attack. In terms of weapon placement, a D&D warship designer would have to include anti-air weaponry and some way to defend against or drive off underwater attackers.

Maybe they'd cobble together alchemical depth charges, or vats of poison to dump into the water to kill/drive off a merfolk attack (the Druid Lobby might have something to say about this). Maybe they'd have harpoon launchers mounted to point straight down off the sides of the ship. As a last resort, they might even drop meat overboard in an attempt to 'chum' the waters and attract sharks to drive off the enemy infantry. They'd definitely have large, pintle-mounted crossbows and ballistae set up to launch arrows, sacks of gravel, pails of nails at hostile fliers.

They might also have netting or awnings strung up over the main deck as a first line of defense against incoming spells and alchemical bombs. The nets might only catch one or two before burning up, but they'd prevent the main deck from being hit right away. Ship designers might also include: flight decks from which aerial infantry can take off and land without hitting the sails and rigging, handholds along the bottom of the ship for aquatic infantry to hold onto while fighting off opponents, so they don't get left behind by the ship, airlocks and hatches in the underside of the ship for covert launch/recovery of aquatic strike teams.


Aquatic races would domesticate and train whales and dolphins for use as pack animals and 'submarine ships'. A large whale might carry a 'backpack' full of freight in between cities. Military forces might have trained, armored Orcas ridden by squads of water-breathing troops for raiding and destroying surface ships.

Spoiler: Infantry

Show

In our universe, on our planet, specialist teams like SEALs are difficult to train, elite, and use expensive specialist gear to allow them to operate underwater for relatively short periods of time. In D&Dland, a SEAeLf team could be cobbled together from their basic infantry force. Paratroopers could similarly be replaced by soldiers who can actually fly. They would not be unusual, although depending on demographics, they might be relatively uncommon.


Aerial infantry can fly over fortifications and surface ships and drop alchemist's fire and acid from a high altitude, so most large targets would need to maintain a 'screen' of their own aerial infantry to serve as interceptors. Perhaps ship-to-ship combat would most closely resemble carrier combat: the ships don't get into direct range of each other, they simply send out long-distance infantry (above and below water) to attack each other.

[Regitnui]

Perhaps ship-to-ship combat would most closely resemble carrier combat: the ships don't get into direct range of each other, they simply send out long-distance infantry (above and below water) to attack each other.

Not that the rest of those are really well thought out and awesome ideas, but I never knew I wanted to see this until I read it. Would have made a great final clash for my pirate campaign.

[Tiadoppler]

Spoiler: Rules and Laws of Warfare

Show

Depending on how real-worldy you want to get, you can consider having international treaties in place:


A Ban on RWPs:
The use of reality warping powers (like Wish) are banned by international law. The knowledge and instructions for the Wish spell (and similar) are strictly controlled. A nation would probably have only a few specialists with knowledge of Wish, and they would be watched carefully. Nations would spend large chunks of their military budget on manufacturing Rings of Wish and carefully hiding them in secure locations, like squirrels burying nuclear acorns.


A Ban on SPNs:
The use of self-propagating necromancy(zombie plagues) is a war crime. Research into self-propagating necromancy is illegal except for a few, multinational laboratories which focus on the creation of cures and countermeasures, with strict supervision and careful safeguards. It is generally assumed, however, that most nations have secret laboratories for SPN research.

Occasional, a rogue SPN researcher (evil necromancer) will show himself and nations around the world will send covert forces (PCs) to destroy the rogue researcher and his creations+research.


A Partial Ban on EPCs:
Most nations around the world accept that the use of Extra-Planar Combatants in warfare is cruel and illegal, however a few large nations disagree, either in general, or for specific use cases. The summoning of demons, devils and other extra-planar combatants is thoroughly illegal for civilians, and used only by a few militaries.



Just some ideas on fleshing out international politics and warfare in a theoretical D&Dland.

[Zephirus]

To put it simply, gunpowder does not make sense in D&D World. Guns and fireballs does not interact well. A wizard throws a fireball into a muket unit and all muskets goes boom in their bearer faces.
Also, why would you waste time and resources building a complex device like a gun if you can just make a pact with a fey, a demon or an unfathomable being from beyond and get the same benefits of always be packing a .40?Or even better, just study the magic of those who do take this pact.
An army of 1's lvl Human Variant Fighters with Magic Initiate(Warlock) feat to grab Eldritch Blast, minor illusion and Armor of Agathys along with Close Quarter Shooter as Fighter's fighting style is probably as dangerous as a musketeer unit, and you don't even need to bother about providing them with a weapon (a weapon would get in the way of casting eldritch blast anyway).
Cast Armor of Agathys before the engagement for the +5hp and retributive damage, cast minor illusion to create marching noise and thus making the unit sound much larger than it really is. Just before engaging this unit get a free eldritch blast volley. On first contact all enemies that hit take 5 points of damage and your unit will probably withstand the charge with the temporary HP. Then you fight with eldritch blasts in melee and shield.
That being said, it is not unlikely that Dwarves or Gnomes or any race not too keen on magic but with some technological edge start manufacturing muskets or pistols and even issuing them to their troops. I would make dwarven fire pistols with the same damage of a War Crossbow, but single handed and you would have to be proficient in gunsmithing tools to be able to reload it, not to shoot. And Dwarven muskets would have 2d6 damage dice, be two handed and also counting as a spear(if you use a bayonette) or quaterstaff in close combat. Also needing proficiency in gunsmithing tools to reload.

[JackPhoenix]

In 5e, Wand of Magic Missiles is better weapon than musket.

It's cheaper (well, not really, as uncommon non-consumable item, it costs the same 500 gp, but doesn't require expensive and volatile ammunition) and faster to make (magic item creation progress at 25 gp/day, while mundane crafting goes with 5gp/day). Though the wandmaker needs to be level 3 character (though that only matters for PCs, as NPCs don't have levels) with a formula and an ability to cast Magic Missile, while the gunsmith only needs appropriate tool proficiency.

It's easier to use (doesn't need attunement or proficiency... anyone can grab WoMM and use it, commoner, child...), it's got the same maximum range (120'), but doesn't suffer penalty for shooting at long range, and actually has 100% accuracy. It's also magical, so it works on lycanthropes and monsters immune or resistant to mundane weapons, and force is the best damage type overall. It's more powerful (3x 1d4+1 vs. musket's 1d12), the "shot" may be empowered with more charges (though this is inefficient, better left for emergencies) and can target up to 3 separate creatures at a time. However, you're limited to 6 charges per day, unless you want to risk destroying the wand, while you can shoot musket as long as you have money (and gunpowder) to burn.

Now, what can the wand actually do? Anyone equiped with the wand can one-shot any normal civilian, even the extra-resilient, hill dwarf commoners, who have 6 hp (increased Con and +1 racial hp compared to human commoner). You can take down basic kobolds just as easily, and reliably (75% chance) deal with goblins (9 hp), thanks to how damage with MM works. You have 50:50 chance to kill guards, bandits, cultists and similar. All with only one charge. With full "magazine" and bit of luck, you can kill up to 21 commoners in 7 rounds (42 seconds)... while being commoner yourself. With the musket, you have to hit first (55% chance for an untrained commoner against another commoner, worse against anyone with better AC), and then have 79.896% chance to inflict enough damage to kill a commoner in one shot. Again, less for anything tougher.

Let's look at the "peasants with guns were the end of armored knights" scenario. For the price of one knight (well, only his plate armor, not other equipment), we can equip 3 commoners with muskets or wands. The knight present in MM fights on foot (greatsword isn't that great while mounted). Let's have the knight attack the peasants from their max range of 120', on the usual featureless plain. What happens?
The commoners with guns need to roll 18+ to hit him, or 16+ if we're generous and give them proficiency (musket is, for some reason, martial weapon in 5e). 15 or 25% chance to hit, each for average 6.5 damage. They also hit at disadvantage at >40'. In the first round, the musketeers fire, inflicting on average 0.715 damage each, and move 30' away from the knight. The knight doesn't use his crossbow, and instead dashes, ending up 90' away from the shooters, with on average 2.145 hp missing from his 52 hp maximum. 2nd round, the same thing happens, the knight ends up 60' away with 4.29 hp missing. 3rd round, peasants move first and ready an action to fire when the knight gets in 40' to avoid disadvantage. Knight ends up 30' away, and suffers average 5.85 damage, for 10.14 hp missing. 4th round, peasants once again inflict 5.85 damage, but the knight reaches them now, and can easily kill them in melee. He may still take some damage, but he lost only about 16 hp to the bullets, less than third of his total.

With wands, it's easier. The wand autohits, causing 10.5 average damage per peasant. The knight lost 31.5 hp in the first turn, the peasants don't even have to move. Only two of them should be needed to finish him off with 21 average damage the next round. 5 charges out of 21 total expanded. The peasants may be able to deal with 3 more knights today.

Now, proper archers or crossbowmen may outrange both muskets and wands, but I think the results of this comparison speak clearly.

To put it simply, gunpowder does not make sense in D&D World. Guns and fireballs does not interact well. A wizard throws a fireball into a muket unit and all muskets goes boom in their bearer faces.
Also, why would you waste time and resources building a complex device like a gun if you can just make a pact with a fey, a demon or an unfathomable being from beyond and get the same benefits of always be packing a .40?Or even better, just study the magic of those who do take this pact.
An army of 1's lvl Human Variant Fighters with Magic Initiate(Warlock) feat to grab Eldritch Blast, minor illusion and Armor of Agathys along with Close Quarter Shooter as Fighter's fighting style is probably as dangerous as a musketeer unit, and you don't even need to bother about providing them with a weapon (a weapon would get in the way of casting eldritch blast anyway).
Cast Armor of Agathys before the engagement for the +5hp and retributive damage, cast minor illusion to create marching noise and thus making the unit sound much larger than it really is. Just before engaging this unit get a free eldritch blast volley. On first contact all enemies that hit take 5 points of damage and your unit will probably withstand the charge with the temporary HP. Then you fight with eldritch blasts in melee and shield.
That being said, it is not unlikely that Dwarves or Gnomes or any race not too keen on magic but with some technological edge start manufacturing muskets or pistols and even issuing them to their troops. I would make dwarven fire pistols with the same damage of a War Crossbow, but single handed and you would have to be proficient in gunsmithing tools to be able to reload it, not to shoot. And Dwarven muskets would have 2d6 damage dice, be two handed and also counting as a spear(if you use a bayonette) or quaterstaff in close combat. Also needing proficiency in gunsmithing tools to reload.

Wizard throws a Fireball into a musket unit and nothing much happens (though he propably kills all the musketeers himself). Fireball doesn't damage equipment.
Army of 1's lvl Human Variant Fighters doesn't exist. Class levels are for player characters, as is human variant, not for NPCs. Army is bunch of appropriate NPCs... propably guards, with some veterans, scouts, nobles, knights and maybe spellcasters and other NPC types (thugs, conscripted commoners, etc.) mixed in.
Firearms are in the DMG.

[PhoenixPhyre]

In 5e, Wand of Magic Missiles is better weapon than musket.

It's cheaper (well, not really, as uncommon non-consumable item, it costs the same 500 gp, but doesn't require expensive and volatile ammunition) and faster to make (magic item creation progress at 25 gp/day, while mundane crafting goes with 5gp/day). Though the wandmaker needs to be level 3 character (though that only matters for PCs, as NPCs don't have levels) with a formula and an ability to cast Magic Missile, while the gunsmith only needs appropriate tool proficiency.

It's easier to use (doesn't need attunement or proficiency... anyone can grab WoMM and use it, commoner, child...), it's got the same maximum range (120'), but doesn't suffer penalty for shooting at long range, and actually has 100% accuracy. It's also magical, so it works on lycanthropes and monsters immune or resistant to mundane weapons, and force is the best damage type overall. It's more powerful (3x 1d4+1 vs. musket's 1d12), the "shot" may be empowered with more charges (though this is inefficient, better left for emergencies) and can target up to 3 separate creatures at a time. However, you're limited to 6 charges per day, unless you want to risk destroying the wand, while you can shoot musket as long as you have money (and gunpowder) to burn.

Now, what can the wand actually do? Anyone equiped with the wand can one-shot any normal civilian, even the extra-resilient, hill dwarf commoners, who have 6 hp (increased Con and +1 racial hp compared to human commoner). You can take down basic kobolds just as easily, and reliably (75% chance) deal with goblins (9 hp), thanks to how damage with MM works. You have 50:50 chance to kill guards, bandits, cultists and similar. All with only one charge. With full "magazine" and bit of luck, you can kill up to 21 commoners in 7 rounds (42 seconds)... while being commoner yourself. With the musket, you have to hit first (55% chance for an untrained commoner against another commoner, worse against anyone with better AC), and then have 79.896% chance to inflict enough damage to kill a commoner in one shot. Again, less for anything tougher.

Let's look at the "peasants with guns were the end of armored knights" scenario. For the price of one knight (well, only his plate armor, not other equipment), we can equip 3 commoners with muskets or wands. The knight present in MM fights on foot (greatsword isn't that great while mounted). Let's have the knight attack the peasants from their max range of 120', on the usual featureless plain. What happens?
The commoners with guns need to roll 18+ to hit him, or 16+ if we're generous and give them proficiency (musket is, for some reason, martial weapon in 5e). 15 or 25% chance to hit, each for average 6.5 damage. They also hit at disadvantage at >40'. In the first round, the musketeers fire, inflicting on average 0.715 damage each, and move 30' away from the knight. The knight doesn't use his crossbow, and instead dashes, ending up 90' away from the shooters, with on average 2.145 hp missing from his 52 hp maximum. 2nd round, the same thing happens, the knight ends up 60' away with 4.29 hp missing. 3rd round, peasants move first and ready an action to fire when the knight gets in 40' to avoid disadvantage. Knight ends up 30' away, and suffers average 5.85 damage, for 10.14 hp missing. 4th round, peasants once again inflict 5.85 damage, but the knight reaches them now, and can easily kill them in melee. He may still take some damage, but he lost only about 16 hp to the bullets, less than third of his total.

With wands, it's easier. The wand autohits, causing 10.5 average damage per peasant. The knight lost 31.5 hp in the first turn, the peasants don't even have to move. Only two of them should be needed to finish him off with 21 average damage the next round. 5 charges out of 21 total expanded. The peasants may be able to deal with 3 more knights today.

Now, proper archers or crossbowmen may outrange both muskets and wands, but I think the results of this comparison speak clearly.

The one thing here is the availability of wands, and their formulas. Note that to create magical items you also need an appropriate (ie DM-determined) item per item. And the formulas are one step more rare than the items themselves. Each crafter needs one as well.

Also, note that the rules there are for PCs crafting. NPCs don't inherently use the same rules. That cuts both ways, but leaves it up to the worldbuilder entirely.

My setting only just recently rediscovered the creation of magical items and it actually ages the creator (a few years for a common item, more for a rarer item) to do so, as you have to invest part of your own soul into it. So no country's going to be fielding armies of commoners with wands anytime soon.

[JackPhoenix]

The one thing here is the availability of wands, and their formulas. Note that to create magical items you also need an appropriate (ie DM-determined) item per item. And the formulas are one step more rare than the items themselves. Each crafter needs one as well.

Formula may be a problem, as can the extra component, though as it is at GM's discretion, it doesn't play role in RAW. However, you can get away with using one formula per 3 crafters, if share it in 8-hour shifts.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Formula may be a problem, as can the extra component, though as it is at GM's discretion, it doesn't play role in RAW. However, you can get away with using one formula per 3 crafters, if share it in 8-hour shifts.

Nothing in RAW matters at all for world-building. NPCs don't play by player rules. That is, it's entirely up to the world-builder as to prices. Thus, discussions of RAW are meaningless for these purposes. The difficulty of creating magic items is a free parameter in world design (as is the number of each tier of spell-casters).

[War_lord]

To put it simply, gunpowder does not make sense in D&D World. Guns and fireballs does not interact well. A wizard throws a fireball into a muket unit and all muskets goes boom in their bearer faces.

We've been through this, there are not enough people capable of casting Fireball in even relatively spellcaster dense Forgotten Realms for that to be a problem. If there were, the effect on warfare would be far more profound then just a lack of guns. Armor, physical weapons and formation fighting would all disappear, no one is going to stand around in a compact formation, wearing totally ineffective armor patently waiting to get Fireballed.

Also, why would you waste time and resources building a complex device like a gun

The arquebus isn't complex, you've already been told in this thread that one of the reasons for its adoption is that it's actually a pretty simple weapon.

if you can just make a pact with a fey, a demon or an unfathomable being from beyond and get the same benefits of always be packing a .40?Or even better, just study the magic of those who do take this pact.

You understand the scale of an army right? We're not talking four people, we're talking 4,000 minimum. Muskets are good because any idiot can be trained to stand in formation and follow the shooting drills.

An army of 1's lvl Human Variant Fighters with Magic Initiate(Warlock) feat to grab Eldritch Blast, minor illusion and Armor of Agathys along with Close Quarter Shooter as Fighter's fighting style is probably as dangerous as a musketeer unit, and you don't even need to bother about providing them with a weapon (a weapon would get in the way of casting eldritch blast anyway).

That's not how NPCs work in 5th edition. Players have player classes, NPCs have monster style statblocks. NPCs don't "take feats". Feats, levels and character classes are purely game concepts. NPCs are assumed to have actually trained to gain whatever skills they have.

Cast Armor of Agathys before the engagement for the +5hp and retributive damage, cast minor illusion to create marching noise and thus making the unit sound much larger than it really is. Just before engaging this unit get a free eldritch blast volley. On first contact all enemies that hit take 5 points of damage and your unit will probably withstand the charge with the temporary HP. Then you fight with eldritch blasts in melee and shield.

Greats, you have an elite guard of, let's be generous, fifty of these magic users, is the rest of the army just sitting back while these guys get swamped by numbers and cut down? A tiny band of elite warrior isn't going to take down an entire army.

That being said, it is not unlikely that Dwarves or Gnomes or any race not too keen on magic but with some technological edge start manufacturing muskets or pistols and even issuing them to their troops. I would make dwarven fire pistols with the same damage of a War Crossbow, but single handed and you would have to be proficient in gunsmithing tools to be able to reload it, not to shoot. And Dwarven muskets would have 2d6 damage dice, be two handed and also counting as a spear(if you use a bayonette) or quaterstaff in close combat. Also needing proficiency in gunsmithing tools to reload.

You don't need to know how to make a musket (which isn't that hard to begin with) to reload a Musket. One of the advantages of early firearms is that you can train a formation in the fundamentals in just a few days. It requires less training then the Crossbows it's replacing, and years less then an English style longbow.

In 5e, Wand of Magic Missiles is better weapon than musket.

It would be, if you could mass produce Wands like you can Muskets. Since in most places in 5th edition you can't do that, the Wand being better doesn't matter on the scale of armies.

[danpit2991]

Danpit, could you go back to your long post and add punctuation? I want to respond, but I can't make heads or tails of it.

i have made so many long ones but i will try

[danpit2991]

I have to disagree with that, at least when it comes to military technology and the political situation. In 500 B.C. heavy Hoplites are the greatest infantry force in Europe. Darius I is the King of an unimaginably vast and powerful (at least to the citizen of a Greek city) Achaemenid Empire, Rome is an obscure city state in a backwater part of the world, Greece is a series of independent cites, Corinth is a booming city. In 100 B.C that same obscure city state is now a vast empire, with uncontested control of the Mediterranean sea. They've also missed the entire rise of Macedonia, Alexander's invading the Achaemenids and establishing his own empire on the rubble, they missed that empire being carved up in the war of the Diadochi. They've totally missed the existence of the Helleno-Persian culture, although they'll find traces of it in Alexandria. One of the many wealthy cities named Alexandria that wasn't on the map when that person vanished, and in the kingdom of Pontus, which is also new to them. What was the heartland of the Persian empire is now ruled by a people called the "Parthians), who apparently won it off a Macedonian dynasty called the "Seleucids".

The city of Corinth doesn't exist anymore, since the Romans wiped them off the map for daring to oppose the total conquest of Hellas itself. Not that Corinth was independent at that time, since they had been subjects of the Macedonians. Oh, I forgot to mention that when our boy/girl was displaced in time in 500 B.C. the Macedonians were considered a joke of a people whose tribal armies were ineffective and who clung to the archaic notion of obeying a king, barely better then barbarians.

I could go on, but I think I've made my point. It's tempting to gloss over history and say "nothing happened for 200 years", but in reality the world changed quite a bit. D&D setting with metaplot tend to be bad at copying that. Could you imagine the uproar if the next book advancing the FR metaplot had Baldur's Gate be demolished, every man dead and every woman and child enslaved?

those chances are more social than technological yes arms and armor evolved during this time but over all the level of tech was the same

[danpit2991]

Eberron is one setting. The assumptions of Eberron do not apply to any other setting. Wands coming in by the crate load is one of those Eberron things. This has been explained, over and over. Like, people keep explaining why magic isn't going to replace every mundane weapon, and you just keep claiming it will.

Are you seriously claiming the Romans didn't invent anything? Like, was the engineering done by Gnomes in your version of history?

the romans invented a great many things, concrete being one of the most amazing but someone born 100 years before rome wouldnt feel that out of place like has been said in other posts its only the last few hundred years that we have made any real progress tech wise, my great great great great grandfather would have been just as familiar with the tech my great grandfather was familiar with

[Regitnui]

The Romans invented a great many things, concrete being one of the most amazing, but someone born 100 years before Rome wouldn't feel that out of place. Like it has been said in other posts, it's only the last few hundred years that we have made any real progress tech-wise. My great-great-great-great-grandfather would have been just as familiar with the tech my great-grandfather was familiar with.

We have encountered a massive boom in technology since the World Wars. All of our living experience on how societies grow and function is wrong when applied to D&D. At best, the D&D world is in an Industrial Revolution. That leaves it growing slowly, maybe over generations rather than within generations. The human brain, after all, doesn't seem to be able to handle as much change as we've had this quickly. Hence, anti-science movements.

[Squiddish]

Gunpowder, simply put, will remain cheaper than magic items essentially forever. When you get to immensely large magic, perhaps it will be more economical. But on the scale of infantry, magic items need an impractical level of skill to produce or use. Remember, magic items don't remove the need for spellcasters. Quite the opposite. Most magic items with potent battlefield abilities are either conventional weapons or either require or strongly encourage use by spellcasters. Only a few, such as the wand of magic missiles, provide anything unique.

And if by some strange circumstances wands of magic missile become standard issue, the opposing side can issue a brooch of shielding to each soldier, invalidating the wand of magic missiles entirely.
Additionally, if uncommon magic items are cheap enough to become standard issue, giving out bracers of archery solves the disadvantage of longbows by giving the equivalent of years of practice.

Mobility increasing items, such as boots of elvenkind, boots of the winterlands, brooms of flying, etc. would be an even greater boon. Elemental gems could turn the tide of a battle by summoning nigh-unkillable rock creatures to smash enemy forces. Gauntlets of ogre power bring each soldier near the peak of human strength. Goggles of the night allow for powerful ambushes. Walloping ammunition of the bullet variety would increase the stopping power even further.

All of these things point to heavily magic equipped armies as being a total waste of money, or an arms race with no end. Magic items would best be reserved for small, well equipped and well trained elite teams.